Borderlands and political theories: Krzysztof Warszewicki reader of Machiavelli

biblioteca di studi slavistici

Polish

cultu

re in th

e Ren

aissance

FIRENZEUNIVERSITY

PRESS

Polish culture in the RenaissanceStudies in the arts, humanism and political thought

edited by

Danilo Facca, Valentina Lepri

Dan

ilo Facca, V

alentin

a Lepri

Mar

taW

ojtk

owsk

a-m

aksy

mik8

533F

irenz

e Uni

vers

ity P

ress

Fire

nze

Unive

rsity

Pre

ss05

/01/

2014

15.

33.3

7

Borderlands and Political Theories: Krzysztof Warszewicki Reader of Machiavelli

Valentina Lepri

Scholars of Machiavelli are well aware that the first Latin editions of his works were dedicated to various Polish nobles. The Latin princeps of Il Prin-cipe, for example, which was printed in Basel in 1560, is dedicated not to Lo-renzo de’ Medici, as Machiavelli intended, but to the Polish knight Abraham Sbąski1. The circumstances are similar also for the Latin version of Discorsi sopra la prima Deca di Tito Livio, which was published in Monbeliard in 1591 by Jacques Folliet and dedicated to the aristocrat Jan Osmólski2. While on the one hand it is possible that these nobles provided financial support for the printing of the Latin Machiavelli, on the other the people who prepared these editions clearly thought that the contents would be useful to the ded-icatees. Why were Machiavelli’s works considered appropriate reading to propose to the Polish establishment?

The Italian philosopher Tommaso Campanella can help to shed light on the answer to this question. Indeed, in his Aforismi politici he notes: “Every community is dominated either by one, like the king in Spain; or by many like the nobles in Venice; or by all like the Athenians and the Swiss; or by one and many together, as in Poland”3. The philosopher grasped the most fascinat-ing aspect of the Lithuanian-Polish Commonwealth at the end of the sixteenth

1 The Italian Dominican friar Pietro Perna was the publisher of Machiavelli’s text. Perna devoted his career to promoting Renaissance culture: he printed Latin versions of works by Machiavelli, Francesco Guicciardini and Jean Bodin. Classical texts such as Paracelsus’s works and the editio princeps from Plotinus’s Enneads are just a few examples of his large and important editorial production. His printing pro-jects involved a team of outstanding editors, such as Thomas Erast, Lodovico Castel-vetro, Celio Secondo Curione. In 1551 Celio Secondo Curione dedicated to Sbąski his edition of Giovenale’s works. On Perna and Curione see Cantimori 1939, Perini 2002 and D’Ascia 2004.

2 In 1586 Theodore Zwinger dedicated to him the third volume of his Theatrum humanae vitae. See Procacci 1995: 133-134, 138. Kaegi 1940: 175-176, 190-195.

3 “In ogni comunità o domina uno come il re in Spagna; o molti come i nobili a Venezia; o tutti come gli ateniesi e gli Svizzeri; o uno e molti insieme come in Po-lonia”, Campanella 1941: 94.

MartaWojtkowska-maksymik8533Firenze University PressFirenze University Press05/01/2014 15.33.37

72 Valentina Lepri

century: it was an elective monarchy in a Europe in which there were only hereditary sovereigns, in which the power of the king was not absolute but, to borrow Campanella’s expression, of “one and many together”. From 1572, that is from the death of the last representative of the Jagiellonian dynasty, Sigis-mund Augustus, the monarchy became elective and the power of the sovereign was limited by the assembly of the nobility, known as the Sejm, which decided on matters of economics and foreign policy4. The nobility that participated in the life of the State was largely Protestant, and had to coexist with a weighty presence of the Catholic church which had established in these parts its most eastern bulwark against the Turks. Indeed, the boundaries were under constant threat from the Ottoman Empire, which naturally influenced the internal po-litical equilibrium. In a country with such complicated dynamics of power, the reception and fate of Machiavelli’s writings was particular too and they were interpreted in an original manner. Among the various Polish writers who ad-dressed Machiavelli’s work, I intend to present here the one that scholars have actually dubbed the Polish Machiavelli: Krzysztof Warszewicki5.

Warszewicki is a decidedly intriguing figure, because he was not only one of the most influential diplomats of his time and counsellor to various sover-eigns of the Lithuanian-Polish Commonwealth. This writer, this Polish Machi-avelli, was also a man of the church, a Jesuit and the stepbrother of Stanisław Warszewicki, rector of the University of Vilnius which at the end of the six-teenth century was one of the most prestigious universities of Eastern Europe6.

The main aim of this essay is not to find the Machiavelli sources in the work of Warszewicki; this has already been done, at least in part. Instead it intends to look at various issues addressed by both writers to point up the sim-ilarities and differences between them. Through these examples it is possible to see how some of Machiavelli’s ideas were utilised by his ‘special’ interpret-er on the basis of the specific political situation of Poland. Within Warszewic-ki’s vast literary production scholars have found references to Machiavelli’s thoughts in two works in particular: the Paradoxa (1579) and the De optimo statu libertatis (1598). The essay shall refer to these only in passing, since it will be concentrate on another work, the De legato legationeque liber, which has been less studied. Here, rather than reporting on his lengthy experience as an ambassador, Warszewicki ponders the management of foreign policy, weighing up the thought of Machiavelli and also appraising the approaches of classical and Italian writers7.

4 See Opaliński 1995.5 See Barycz 1946, Lesnodorski 1949: 257-279 and Malarczyk 1969.6 Warszewicki studied in Germany and in Italy spending two years in Bolo-

gna (1557-1559). 7 Such as Alberico Gentili, Francesco Guicciardini and Torquato Tasso. See

Tamborra 1965 and Quirini-Popławska 1973.

Mar

taW

ojtk

owsk

a-m

aksy

mik

8533

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

05/0

1/20

14 1

5.33

.37

73Borderlands and Political Theories

1. The identity of the ambassador-sovereign

First published in Cracow in 1595 by the Officina Lazari, the De legato is presented in the form of a humanistic Institutio, enumerating the qualities that an ambassador ought to possess. The good diplomat is a man of many parts, among which he is required to be mature in years, of handsome appearance and most importantly to be endowed with a special talent for prudent dissem-bling. The most important qualities are contained in the following passage:

[…] finally, in any case, a sincere love of the Catholic religion must be striven for, just as the ambassador must pursue loyalty, as he must pursue prudence, as he must pursue temperance and finally as he must pursue strength, which is like a wall of steel and is never sufficiently praised8.

The entire passage recalls not only the cardinal virtues but also obviously the second book of Cicero’s De inventione. The aspect that should be to stress in particular is that, for Warszewicki, these qualities characterising the diplo-mat are the same that ought to be possessed by the sovereign9. In the De legato the close connection between these two figures emerges right at the start, in the dedicatory letter to Stanislao Mincio. In the preface the author uses the famous Aristotelian image of the state represented as a human body, with the ambassador embodying the eyes of the state, observing the world on behalf of the prince10.

In the sixteenth-century treatises the notion of the identification of the sovereign with his emissaries is common, and is also to be found in Machia-velli. For example, this concept is expressed in chapter XXII of Il Principe,

8 “Religionis porro Catholicae sincerum ubicunque studium, sequatur neces-sario in legato fides, sequatur prudentia, sequatur temperantia, et ipsa denique, quae murus adamantini est instar, nunquam satis laudata sequatur fortitudo”. Warsze-wicki 1595: 250.

9 “Legati tam eius in quo nati sunt populi, quam ipsiusmet, a quo mittuntur, magistratus simulachra”. Warszewicki 1595: 246. For an outline of Cicero’s influence on Polish culture see Otwinowska 1973, Axer 2007 and Gaj 2009, among others.

10 “Alia enim aliorum in nostro corpore membrorum; soli illi legati in im-perio similitudinem referunt oculorum. Quibus cum non in aliquo alio theatro, sed in oculis orbis terrae”, Dedication letter, Warszewicki 1595: 243. See Facca 2010: 7-35. See also the link with Cicero’s Orations: “[…] ita quaestor sum factus ut mihi illum honorem tum non solum datum, sed etiam creditum et commissum putarem; sic obtinui quaesturam in Sicilia provincia ut omnium oculos in me unum coniectos esse arbitrarer, ut me quaesturamque meam quasi in aliquo terrarum orbis theatro versari existimarem, ut semper omnia quae iucunda videntur esse, ea non modo his extraordinariis cupiditatibus, sed etiam ipsi naturae ac necessitati denegarem”. Cicero 1891: II, 5, 35.


74 Valentina Lepri

where naturally the argument is addressed ex parte principis: “the choice of his ministers is not of small importance to a prince. These are good, or not, depending on the prudence of the prince. And the first conjecture that is made about the mind of a lord is in seeing the men that he has around him. And if they are capable and faithful one may always reckon him wise, since he has known how to recognize that they are capable and to maintain them faithful”11.

In this passage, the “ministers” are not the “eyes” of the sovereign, but become a sort of mirror of his “mind” and the good reputation of the prince is also dependent on their loyalty: indeed, in sending his ambassadors out into the world the prince displays his personal worth.

Warszewicki’s meditation on the representative value of the ambassador explores this role in greater depth than Machiavelli; it is no longer simply a two-way relationship between sovereign and diplomat, other figures are also involved. Warszewicki writes that the ambassador: “is the image both of the people who gave him birth and of that very authority which has sent him”12. The author’s specification is triggered partially by his awareness of the ‘mixed’ nature of the Lithuanian-Polish Confederation in which the different powers are distributed between the king and the assembly of nobles. But in his reference to the birth and origins of the ambassador, we can also grasp a deep sense of belonging to a community, almost a bond of blood, that gives even more weight to the ambassadorial role.

The diplomat who represents the king and the people, and to a degree embodies it, becomes, as Warszewicki sees it, a pivotal element in the gov-ernance of the sovereign. Indeed, to administer the state, the prince needs two things, “duo ad gubernandum necessaria”, “a knowledge of the laws […] and as precise a notion as possible of the customs and the natural tendencies of the peoples”13. This precious knowledge of the peoples can come to him only through the offices of the ambassador, since the diplomat knows his own people through birthright and he knows other peoples because he is also “the eyes” of the sovereign abroad.

11 Machiavelli 2005: 34. The original version is: “Non è di poca importanzia a uno principe la elezione de’ ministri: li quali sono buoni o no, secondo la prudenzia del principe. E la prima coniettura che si fa del cervello d’uno signore, è vedere li uomini che lui ha d’intorno; e quando sono sufficienti e fedeli, sempre si può repu-tarlo savio, perché ha saputo conoscerli sufficienti e mantenerli fideli”. Machiavelli 1995: 180, See also Vivanti 2001: 27-28.

12 “[…] legati tam eius in quo nati sunt populi, quam ipsiusmet, a quo mittun-tur, magistratus simulachra”. Warszewicki 1595: 246, see also Tamborra 1965: 90.

13 “Multas ego magnasque res, sed vel has potissimus duas, desiderari ani-madverto gentibus nationibusque gubernandis, unam quidem legum maxime vero municipalium scientia; populorum altera, quibus aliquis preafuerint, morum et in-geniorum cognitionem exactissimam”. Warszewicki 1595: 245.



2. Political dynamism and religion

Another aspect worth dwelling on is the insistence with which the Pol-ish writer stresses the political dynamism that ought to characterise the good diplomat.

The ambassador must “indulge little or not at all in idleness, but devote himself increasingly to action”14. Certain scholars have attributed Warsze-wicki’s emphasis on a life of action to the influence of Protestant ideas, and to the impact of Calvinist culture in particular. Without wishing to rule out such an interpretation tout court, we could however suggest the presence of various Italian and Machiavellian works on Warszewicki’s desk as he was composing the De legato.

In the first place, the works of the Florentine humanists who, in the man-agement of the modern Republic wished to revive the ancient ideals expressed in the Somnum Scipionis, the story with which Cicero ends the Republic. The model of political life as commitment and action, as against the solitary life of contemplation, is sustained by Coluccio Salutati, Leonardo Bruni, Poggio Bracciolini and later by Leon Battista Alberti and Matteo Palmieri. Like Cicero, the Florentine humanists exalt the political dynamism that confers an almost divine character upon the rulers of states. For Warszewicki too, the sovereign and his ambassador are virtuous, in the sense that they act po-litically and through their constant engagement become a reflection, albeit imperfect, of God. As Warszewicki writes: “the figure of the ambassador is, and must be, something sacred”15.

The subject of political dynamism also brings out an interesting parallel between Machiavelli and Warszewicki, since for both political action is bound up with a civil use of religion. Certainly, in some ways they are an odd couple: on the one hand Machiavelli, who was the first to conceive a policy to which considerations of a moral or religious kind were alien, and on the other a Je-suit. For Warszewicki religious unity is necessary to curb the expansion of the Turks, and this subject is constantly addressed in his works: we find it in the Paradoxa, in De optimo statu libertatis and also in De legato. He writes in the Paradoxa: “just as the discord of the Christians was the source and or-igin of evils, so from modest and obscure beginnings the Turkish people has risen to majesty and greatness”16. In composing his reflections, it is possible

14 “[…] parum aliud aut nihil temporis otio, plus semper tribuamus negotio”. Warszewicki 1595: 312.

15 “[…] sunt namque et debent esse legati corpora sancta”. Warszewicki 1595: 246.

16 “[…] quantum malorum fons et origo Christianorum dissensiones fuerint et quam a modicis et obscuris principiis ad tantam amplitudinem et maiestatem gens Turcica pervenerit”. Warszewicki 1589: A1r-v.

Mar

taW

ojtk

owsk

a-m

aksy

mik8

533F

irenz

e Uni

vers

ity P

ress

Fire

nze

Unive

rsity

Pre

ss05

/01/

2014

15.

33.3

7

76 Valentina Lepri

that Warszewicki also had in mind the view expressed by Machiavelli not so much in Il Principe, as in several passages dealing with the Roman religion in Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio. Here one of the most famous:

Ancient religion beatified only men fully possessed of worldly glory, such as the leaders of armies and the rules of republics. Our religion has more often glorified humble and contemplative men rather than active ones. […] Although it appears that the world has become soft and heaven has been disarmed, without a doubt this arises more from the cowardice of men who have interpreted our religion according to an ideal of freedom from earthly toil and not according to one of exceptional ability. For if they would consider how our religion permits us to ex-alt and defend our native land, they would seet that it also wants us to love and honour it and to prepare ourselves in such a way that we can defend it17.

Republican Rome, as an antique model of mixed government where the power was divided between the Senate and the consuls, is a political example that offers a fitting comparison with the Lithuanian-Polish Confederation18. It is possible that, while writing the De legato, Warszewicki may have turned more readily to a reading of the Discorsi than of Il Principe. Machiavelli the-orises a religion at the service of the necessities of the state, an instrumentum regni, and as we know he was pessimistic about the Italian situation, predict-ing that the papacy – as a state within a state – would never have the strength to unify the country.

Warszewicki too conceives religion as an instrumentum regni. It ought to play a role in foreign policy, giving rise to a religious hegemony between Catholic countries that would in this way be able to conquer the fearful common enemy: the Turks. But for Warszewicki religion also has another role: it is religious inspiration that guides the construction of the state, since it is in relation to the other-worldly that the birth of the state takes place. The state emerges at the moment when the sovereign takes God – we might say – platonically as model. This is why the ambassador who represents the prince is, as cited above, himself “something sacred”. This is a dimension

17 Book II, chapter II in Machiavelli 1997: 159. See the original version in Machiavelli, 1984, vol. I, par. 30-36, pp. 318-319: “La religione antica […] non be-atificava se non uomini pieni di mondana gloria, come erano i capitani di eserciti e principi di republiche. La nostra religione ha glorificato piú gli uomini umili e con-templativi che gli attivi. […] E benché paia che si sia effeminato il mondo e disarmato il cielo, nasce piú, sanza dubbio, dalla viltà degli uomini, che hanno interpretato la nostra religione secondo l’ozio, e non secondo la virtú. Perché, se considerassono come la ci promette l’esaltazione e la difesa della patria, vedrebbono come la vuole che noi l’amiamo e onoriamo, e prepariamoci a essere tali che noi la possiamo difen-dere”. On religion in Machiavelli’s thought see Cutinelli-Rendina 1998.

18 See Stacy 2007.

Mar

taW

ojtk

owsk

a-m

aksy

mik

8533

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

05/0

1/20

14 1

5.33

.37


alien to Machiavelli, since for the Florentine religion is not involved in the genesis of politics. The notion of the almost divine nature of the sovereign shared by the humanists Salutati, Bruni and Bracciolini is validly relevant for Warszewicki but not for Machiavelli. Or rather, it is precisely the Jesu-it’s acceptance of the moral conscience and sacred aura proper to politics that opens up a huge chasm between the position of Warszewicki and that of Machiavelli.

To get a better understanding of the use of Machiavelli’s thought in the De legato, and the general objectives that spurred the writer, we have to set his work within a broader perspective.

The De legato was printed in 1595 together with two other works bound in the same volume: the Turcicae quatuordecim, consisting of 14 orations dealing with the expansion of the Turkish Empire, and Warszewicki’s Latin version of the Concejo y consejeros del Príncipe by the Spanish human-ist Fadrique Furió Ceriol19. In this very work, Ceriol draws extensively on Machiavelli’s thought: he sustains that the complexity of events can be con-trolled by political science and proposes himself as a counsellor to the young sovereign Philip II. Possibly Warszewicki too is putting himself forward as a counsellor to the prince, pointing out the path to be followed. The book containing these three works – the Turcicae, De legato and Concejo – does indeed appear to be addressed by Warszewicki to Sigismund III Vasa, who just a few years before it was printed, in 1592, brought the Lithuanian-Pol-ish Commonwealth and Sweden together under his crown. This new state was the largest in the world after the Grand Duchy of Moscow, and called for an innovative model of government provided in the Concejo, an accurate analysis of foreign policy given in the Turcicae, and a pondered institutio for those who were to be engaged in future negotiations furnished by the De legato.

And so is Warszewicki or is he not the Polish Machiavelli? In the De legato Warszewicki emerges as a reader of Machiavelli, but also of Cicero and several Italian autoritates, such as the leading intellectuals of the civil humanism of the fifteenth century20. His concept of politics appears to fuse two models of reference: first of all a policy that is bounded, institutionalised and governed by rules, in which the stakeholders – sovereign, ambassador, Catholic countries – collaborate by virtue of a reciprocal incompleteness. Then there is another policy, of Machiavellian inspiration, that is not guided by an ideal or a norm but is conceived in terms of strength and efficiency. The general impression is that Warszewicki drew on certain of Machiavelli’s ideas to address a situation of great emergency within the Lithuanian-Pol-

19 Previously published in Antwerp in 1559. On Ceriol’s thought see D’Ascia 1999a and 1999b.

20 See Quirini-Popławska 1973.


78 Valentina Lepri

ish Commonwealth. He indeed witnessed not only the transformation of the monarchy and the division of power between the king and the assembly of nobles, he was also a concerned observer of the western expansion of the Ottoman Empire. If Warszewicki did take in some of Machiavelli’s lessons, it may be because he had to address a situation of crisis, and precisely the extraordinary nature of the circumstances make the adoption of extreme and radical stances such as those of Machiavelli appear legitimate, even to a Je-suit such as Warszewicki.



Appendix

The following are the letters of dedication written by Krzysztof Warsze-wicki and contained in the volume Turcicae quatuordecim […] L. Friderici Ceriole, De concilio & consiliariis principis, ex Hispanico in Latinum ver-sum, & De legato legationeque, published by Łazarz Andrysowicz, in Cra-cow in 159521.

The letters were inserted at the beginning of Turcicae quatuordecim, Ce-riol’s Concejo and De legato and the contents provide additional details about the author’s aims and his cultural milieu.

Serenissimo principi, et domino, domino Sigismundo III regi Poloniae et Sve-ciae S.P.

Cum una ex Svecia tecum, Sigismunde rex, Dantiscum appulissem, et de maiori quotidie Europae a turcis incendio accepissem nuncium, ut minora omnia, quae summa hic requiruntur, habeam, pro antiquioris parentis patriae charitate, facere non potui, ac nec debui quidem, quominus prioribus Turcicis meis tribus, quibus olim Turcam Persico bello occupatum urgendum suade-bam, undecim alias adiungerem, et Philippicarum Ciceronis instar, dispari li-cet ingenii et eloquentiae laude, sub tuo sacrato nomine pervulgarem. Utinam saltem alium quam olim M. Tullii exitum (quae tamen in lucem veritatis pro-ferri debuit) mea sortiatur commentatio. Sed utcunque tandem evenerit, modo Respublica salva sit, non laborabo. Omnia quippe omnium regnorum comitia, sed Polonici maxime, perpetuam belli Turcici meditationem continere est ne-cesse, utpote cum pleraque christianorum bella, pax et ocium, solum illud Tur-cicum immature et intempestive gestum, servitus et exitium consequatur. Qua etiam de causa, magnus ille Tarnovius Comes22, Polonis suis perpetuo vigilan-dum et Turcae foederibus nunquam fidendum esse censebat, cum ille Polonos tanquam in quodam vivario ad certam praedam sibi servaret, ne interim binis in locis simul bellum gerere cogeretur. Quod quam firmis rationibus adductus tum suaderit, cum et Solymanus aliis Otthomanis foederibus colendis constan-tiorem, et Hungariam adhuc integriorem viderat, non facile dixero; nae haud quidem et parum ille vidisse, et in artibus tam bellicis quam urbanis exercita-tum fuisse, dubitanter affirmabo; loquebatur enim ut multi, sentiebat ut pauci, quod illius solidae, rerum dominae argumentum erat sapientiae. Atque idem ille, cum propter Rhodum tanquam nidulum quendam Ionio mari inclusum, a Solymano Turca captum, cum Sigismundo suo Rege abiectis ornamentis, ve-stem pullam induit, hacque ratione dolorem suum maximum prae se tulit, quid

21 I have seen exemplar BN BOZ 375 in the National Library in Warsaw.22 Jan Tarnowski (1488-1561).

MartaW

ojtkowska-m

aksymik8533Firenze U

niversity PressFirenze University Press05/01/2014 15.33.37

80 Valentina Lepri

iam faceret vicino Hungariae regno, decore et praesidio christiani nominis et Polonici regni patrimonio, annon eaque subsidio ambusto, et ceu quodam mor-tuo cadavere intuendo? Omnis profecto arcendis malis procrastinatio pericu-losa est, sed vicino ardente pariete periculosissima. Quo etiam magis, dum his tot tan[4]tisque, quae nos manent, malis medicinam disquiro et quae ad rem quadrare possint, mecum ipse attentius considero; adieci his Turcicis, vel opuscula, alia duo, L. Friderici Ceriole, de Concilio et Consiliariis Principis: unum ex Hispanico in Latinum versum, quod inter tot et tantos praestantes Se-natores tuos, quem, unum alteri hac in parte praeposuissem, nescius; tandem Illustrissimi Principi Cardinali Radiuilo23, utpote Hispanicae linguae, morum et institutorum gnaro, inscribere placuit: et de legato, legationeque meum opu-sculum alterum, perillustri viro Stanislao Mincio24, Palatino Lancisciensi, qui tanta cum dignitate, tuo nomine, obiuit legationem Romae dedicatum; ut quo-niam haec dubia et formidolosa Reipublicae tempora, ad res quasque maximas tractandas, et conficendas, consiliaris et legatis idoneis opus habeant. Abeant interim leviora negotia alia. Et tu, qui sicuti praeesse, sic et debes omnibus vir-tute praeivisse, quoad eius fieri per occupationes magis poterit, hos consiliaros mutos, tuis aliquando consultationibus etiam adhibeto, quos olim ille Alphon-sus Arragonum et Neapoleos Rex25, vere appellatus sapiens, optimos et vera-cissimos esse censebat: praesertim cum Ceriola ex media virorum Principum orbis terrae luce, salutarium consiliorum et institutorum doctis praeceptioni-bus et appositis exemplis, tantus auctor fuerit, tantum dici et haberi maximus hac tempestate potuerit. Quem biennio ante Ioannes Cevenbilerus, Caesareus in Hispaniis legatus, vir summus in eas navigaturus, diem suum obiisse, ius-sit mihi nunciari. Quod ideo commemoro, ne aut falsam apud mortus vena-ri gratiam, aut transferendis idiomatibus in latinum externis ostentare velle videar industriam; quorum alterum stuporis, alterum esse vanitatis. De meis interim monimentis aliorum esto iudicium, et inprimis, Rex optime, tuuum, cui pro mea tenui et infima parte, ad hoc tamen necessarium bellum aliis quo-que excitandis, immo et laborioso genere et instituto vitae, ad posteri tempo-ris memoriam, hanc quantulacumque meam, cum aliis, quae mox et plures et graviores sequentur, relinquam lucubrationem, testem meae perpetuae erga te observantiae et constantissimae in Rempublicam voluntatis, quam omnibus in rebus perspicies, quae ad eius tuamque amplitudinem maxime pertinebunt. Quod reliquum esr felix et augustum, aequabile diuturnumque imperium, et de hereditariis christiani nominis et seminis hostibus desideratam victoriam divinitus tibi precor.

Cracoviae Idibus Februarii Anno 1595.

23 Jerzy Radziwiłł (1556-1600).24 Stanisław Miński (1561-1607).25 Alfonso I, king of Naples (1396-1458).

Mar

taW

ojtk

owsk

a-m

aksy

mik

8533

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

05/0

1/20

14 1

5.33

.37


Sacrae Maiestatis vestrae Regiae Devotissimus et fidissimus subiectus et servus. C. Varsevicius.

Illustrissimo Principi et Reverendissimo Domino, Domino Georgio, mi-seratione divina, tituli S. Sixti, S.R.E. presbytero cardinali Radivilo nuncupa-to, perpetuo administrationi Episcopatus Cracoviensis Ducatusque Severien-sis, nec non Olicae et Niesviez Duci, etc. Etc. Domino semper colendissimo.

Qui non modo suo marte edendis, verum etiam aliorum bonis converten-dis desudant libris, nae haud illi inepte fecisse et oleum (quod aiunt) operam-que videntur mihi amisisse. Alienae enim lucubrationis versio fidelis, cum utili est multis, tum tuae ipsius opinionem praebet omnibus, et argumentum navitatis. Quo magis hunc Ceriolam Hispanum, latine a me versum et sub tuo, Illustrissime Princeps, prodeuntem nomine, si non omnibus, sanioribus saltem probatum iri spero, opto quidem certe. Verbo enim verbo redditum est, quidquid in materiam tam gravi et ardua, breviter et succincte ab eo est exara-tum. Quod sane, multis multorum vel longissimis commentationibus est pra-eferendum. Sic enim respondet acumen ingenii pectoris candori et disputandi subtilitas sententiarum gravitati, ut tales Ceriolae consiliarii, omni aevo opta-ri quam sperari videantur mihi magis potuisse. Sed utinam quidem, vel aliqua aliquando extet eorum similitudo, cum Catones praeturis, et non hae illis, sint fuerintque semper magis quaerendae, minus fortasse his moribus et tempori-bus Respublica laboraret. Quod tamen ego assequi si vellet, velle autem debet, principum posse dicerem non neminem, vel hoc uno Ceriola per otium lecti-tando. Est enim rectus et tectus dandis consiliis, sic ut, licet ab alio quodam etiam conversum audierim, viderim quidem nunquam, non poenituerit me in eo vertendo laboris et obitae, si quae sunt, difficultatis, uno illo excepto, quod in Polonicis quibusdam hallucinatus est rebus et nimis magnam in candida-tos dedisse licentiam, aulae pesti videtur, obrectatoribus. Quod tamen ipsum non maligno animo illum fecisse, et hos si [196] qui fuerunt naevos, praecla-ris aliis consiliis obscurasse et ab Hispanico nomine tyrannidis suspitionem falsam, quam alienae felicitatis comes invidia, et civiles, inciviles admodum, inter Christianos discordiae gignere consueverunt, quantum in eo fuit amo-visse, quis ignorat? Quae una (pace aliarum dixerim) natio inter tot tantasque alias haud scio si obtinuerit in multis principatum, sive imperii quam habet amplitudinem sive religionis spectes constantiam sive denique morum prae aliis firmiorum et monetae (licet minimum id fuerit) non suspectae cudendae intueare rationem. Quae peraeque omnia non ita ubique inventu sunt facilia et vel ipsa adeo monimenta, qualia ex Hispaniis prodeunt scriptorum, afferunt nostro seculo lucem et nomen genti existimationemque singularem. In quibus hunc unum Ceriolam, Illustrissime Princeps, dedicare postissimum placuit tibi, quod et Hispanicae linguae gnarus et in omnibus Hispaniarum regnis summa cum pietatis tuae et sanctimoniae laude versatus, proptereaque et in aula illa a summo regum imprimis honoratus, et a me, antequam haec ede-

Mar

taW

ojtk

owsk

a-m

aksy

mik

8533

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

05/0

1/20

14 1

5.33

.37

82 Valentina Lepri

rem, quasi alter Ceriolae consiliarius semper fueris existimatus. Quem Deus Opt. Max. florentem et quam diutissime servet incolumem. Ego, quod reli-quum fuerit, me servitutemque meam offero et commendo tibi sempiternam. Vale. Cracoviae xxvii Iunii, Anno 1595.

D[ominationi] Vestrae Illustriss[imae] et Reverendiss[imae]

Addictiss[imus] servitor C. Varsevicius.

Illustrissimo Domino, Domino Stanislao Minscio Palatino Lanciciensi Capi-taneo Livensis etc. etc. Domino suo observandissimo S.P.

Mitto tibi librum de legato et legatione meum, cuius tu quidem linea-menta (quod aiunt) omnia, non verbis, sed rebus expressisti ipsis inque ipso docuisti te virtutis quam aetatis cursus esse celeriorem. Quo nomine, ut de-beo, gratulor vel plurimum tibi et haec, quantulacumque ingenii mei moni-menta, dico consecroque lubens, non tam ex aliorum eruta libris, quam ex usu prompta observationeque communi. Quo etiam magis utilitatem vel aliquam alicui, tibi certe uni, qui quae et quomodo gesseris ipse in iis, tecum recogno-sces, legenti voluptatem spero allatura. Cui quidem pro tam praeclaere navata Reipublicae opera, nulla fere digna a nobis gratia referri facile potest, nec ulla non debet. Multa ego multarum video ornamenta gentium, sed illud unum vel maximum, legatorum et legationum, cum publica totius regni dignitate; alia enim aliorum in nostro corpore membrorum, soli illi legati in imperio simili-tudinem referunt oculorum. Quibus cum non in aliquo alio theatri, sed in ocu-lis orbis terrae et sacrario religionis Romae, in omni genere laudis, de princi-patu certavisti et illud nimirum in tot tantisque aliis consecutus es, ut beatus Hiacynthus a Clemente octavo Pont. Opt. Max. divorum in numerum referre-tur, summa cum tua Polonicique nominis laude et Ecclesiae Dei religionisque catholicae splendore et maiestate. Etenim nihil quam sanctitas et Pontificum Maximorum vera illa et legitima ab Apostolorum principe profecta successio, et quae semper et ubique et ab omnibus uno ore et pectore culta est religio, demum vero miracula in ea edita, Christi Opt. Max. Ecclesiam firmam et in-signem magis reddiderint. Cui rei et orthodoxae doctrinae notarum claritati, quoniam ex hoc nostro Aquilone, tu quoque vel aliquid intulisti lucis, laetatus profecto hoc nomine magnopere sum omniaque opum et honoris insignia et ornamenta dignitatis deberi tibi agnosco gratulorque ex animo, cum dubium fuerit nemini quantum in splendidis scienterque obitis legationibus regnis et provinciis positum sit semperque fuerit et quanta non adumbrata, sed expres-sa vestigia Romae reliqueris virtutis, pietatis, prudentiae et [244] humanitatis tuae singularis, digna tali tantoque viro mihi fuisse ut videatur legatio et vir ipse legatione memoranda. Quo ipso ornato reverteris summa ad nos gloria et a duobus Pontificibus Max. Innocentio et Clemente, utrisque octavi nomen



sortientibus, ea refers munera qualia maiorum tuorum praestantium ossa et imprimis matris tuae optimae et speciatissimae foeminae pietas et reliqua or-namenta requirunt. Quibus omnibus utinam quam diutissime perfruare. Hanc ego quidem non solum veram, sed unam dixero nobilitatem atque gloriam, quae et maiorum imaginibus clara et luculentissimis haereditatibus aucta et obitis honorificis legationibus insignita et omni denique ornamentorum ge-nere est illustrata. Sic ut tu tuique similes legationibus quaerendi et non tam ambientibus, quam refugientibus ille dandae, nec tam pompa, quam rebus instructi legati ad exteros dimittendi potius videantur. Bene vale, decus et ornamentum patriae. Varsaviae Calendis Decembri 1595.

Dominationi Vestrae Illustrissimae

Addictissimus servitor C. Varsevicius

Bibliography

Axer 2007: J. Axer, The Classical Tradition in Central-Eastern Europe, in: Companion to the Classical Tradition, ed-ited by C.W. Kallendorf, London 2007, pp. 132-155.

Barycz 1946: H. Barycz, Mysl i legenda Machiavella w Polsce w XVI i XVII, “Nauka i Sztuka”, vol. II, 1946, n. 2.

Campanella 1941: T. Campanella, Aforismi politici, 13, edited by L. Fir-po, Turin 1941, p. 94.

Cantimori 1939: D. Cantimori, Eretici italiani del Cinquecento. Ricerche storiche, Florence 1939.

Cicero 1891: Cicero, Orationes Pro Quinctio… In verrem, in: http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/cicero/ver.shtml

Cutinelli-Rendina 1998: E. Cutinelli-Rendina, Chiesa e religione in Machia-velli, Pisa 1998.

D’Ascia 1999a: L. D’Ascia, Fadrique Furió Ceriol fra Erasmo e Machiavelli, “Studi Storici”, 40, No. 2, (Apr.-Jun., 1999): pp. 551-584.

D’Ascia 1999b: L. D’Ascia, Fadrique Furió Ceriol: Consigliere del principe nella Spagna di Filippo II, “Studi Storici”, 40, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec., 1999): pp. 1037-1086.

D’Ascia 2004: L. D’Ascia, Erasmo da Rotterdam, Celio Secondo Curione, Giordano Bruno, Bologna 2004.

Facca 2010: D. Facca, Phronesis, arete, theoria. Recepcja arysto-telesowskiej filozofii praktycznej w Polsce na począt-


84 Valentina Lepri

ku XVII wieku, in: A. Nowicka-Jeżowa (ed.), Human-itas. Projekty antropologii humanistycznej, Warsaw 2010, II, pp. 7-35.

Gaj 2009: B. Gaj, Cyceron – nauczyciel śląskiej młodzieży. Dydaktyzm w retoryce, czyli o wykorzystaniu reto-ryki Cycerońskiej na przykładzie śląskich gimnaz-jów humanistycznych od XVI do XVIII, “Symbolae Philologorum Posnaniensium Graecae et Latinae”, 2009, 29: pp. 363-374.

Grześkowiak-Krwawicz 2010: A. Grześkowiak-Krwawicz, Machiavelli i ma-kiawelizm w Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów, o po-trzebie badań, in: J. Partyka, A. Masłowska-Nowak (eds.), “Libris satiari nequeo…” Oto ksiąg jestem niesyty. Pamięci Ewy Głębickiej, Warsaw 2010, pp. 73-83.

Kaegi 1940: W. Kaegi, Machiavelli in Basel, in: Basler Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Altertumskunde, 39 (1940): 175-176, 190-195; reprinted in Kaegi, Historische Medi-tationen (Zurich 1942).

Lesnodorski 1949: B. Lesnodorski, Polski Makiawel, in: Studia z dziejów kultury polskieij, Warsaw 1949, pp. 257-279.

Malarczyk 1969: J. Malarczyk, La fortuna di Niccolò Machiavelli in Polonia, Accademia polacca di scienze e lettere, Rome 1969.

Machiavelli 1984: N. Machiavelli, Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio, edited by G. Inglese, Milan 1984.

Machiavelli 1995: N. Machiavelli, Il Principe, edited by E. Janni, Milan 1995, Cap. XXII, p. 180.

Machiavelli 1997: N. Machiavelli, Discourses on Livy, translated with an introduction and notes by J. Conaway Bondanella and P. Bondanella, Oxford – New York 1997.

Machiavelli 2005: N. Machiavelli, The Prince, translated by W.J. Con-nell, Boston 2005.

Opaliński 1995: E. Opaliński, Kultura polityczna szlachty polskiej w latach 1587-1652: system parlamentarny a społec-zeństwo obywatelskie, Warsaw 1995.

Otwinowska 1973: B. Otwinowska, Cyceronianizm polski, in: Literatura staropolska i jej związki europejskie, red. J. Pelc, Wrocław 1973.

Perini 2002: L. Perini, La vita e i tempi di Pietro Perna, Rome 2002.

Mar

taW

ojtk

owsk

a-m

aksy

mik

8533

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

Fire

nze

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

05/0

1/20

14 1

5.33

.37


Procacci 1995: G. Procacci, Machiavelli nella cultura europea dell’età moderna, Rome-Bari 1995.

Quirini-Popławska 1973: D. Quirini-Popławska, Działalność Włochów w Polsce w I połowie XVI wieku na dworze królewskim, w dyplomacji i hierarchii kościelnej, Wrocław 1973.

Stacy 2007: P. Stacy, Roman Monarchy and The Renaissance Prince, Cambridge 2007.

Tamborra 1965: A. Tamborra, Krzysztof Warszewicki e la diplomazia del Rinascimento in Polonia, Rome 1965.

Vivanti 2001: C. Vivanti, Machiavelli e l’informazione diplomatica nel primo Cinquecento, in: La lingua e le lingue di Machiavelli, Florence 2001, pp. 27-28.

Warszewicki 1588: K. Warszewicki, Paradoxa ad Stephanum I, Regem Poloniae, Prague 1588.

Warszewicki 1595: K. Warszewicki, Turcicae quatuordecim: his accesse-runt opuscula duo: L. Friderici Ceriole, De concilio & consiliariis principis, ex Hispanico in Latinum ver-sum vnum, & De legato legationequ, Cracow 1595.


Documents

Borderlands and political theories: Krzysztof Warszewicki reader of Machiavelli